To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

The MAROON Vol. 65, No. 3 Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 September 12, 1986 Students need personal touch By Mary Caffrey News Editor HERETO STAY? Loyola fights retention problem Richard was once a student at Loyola. He arrived at Biever Hall last year with a 1430 SAT score, a scholarship and all the wide-eyed enthusiasm of a child loose in a candy store. As a high school student, Richard (not his real name) never learned to handle social situations. His family had always told him when to eat, when to study and when to sleep. Now he was suddenly free — and in New Orleans of all places. Richard's first trip to a bar led to a discipline report for vomiting into a trash can. A Residential Life official met with him a few times after the incident. "He tried to get to know me a little, but he had a lot of other things to worry about," he said. During that first semester Richard skipped onethird of his classes, did poorly on tests and spent his nights playing video games in the Wolf Pub. Only one of his professors mentioned his poor attendance, and Richard said the comment "wasn't the kind of thing you took seriously." Richard had two 10-minute meetings with his departmental adviser that semester. He said the honors adviser in charge of administering his scholarship tried to help, but that wasn't until Richard showed up at his office a week before final exams. After one semester, Richard had a 1.0 grade point average and a bad case of bronchitis that later developed into pneumonia, forcing him to take a medical withdrawal from the university during his second semester. Richard said his lack of maturity made his adjustment problems inevitable. "I probably would have done just as bad anywhere else. The only thing that might have helped would have been waiting a few years, [before leaving home] and then i might not have fallen down as far; maybe I would have had a C average," he said. "I really don't think the university is responsible." Richard's case is extreme, but like many other students who leave Loyola, he was sending out warning signals almost from the very first day — signals that were scattered like parts of a puzzle the university couldn't put together. Although Richard, who is now attending a small commuter college in his hometown, doesn't hold Loyola responsible for what happened, the university is beginning to take responsibility for students like him. A report last year from John F. Sears, director of Institutional Research, showed that 52.1 percent of the freshmen who entered Loyola in 1981 left before completing their degree. Following that report, both the University Retention Committee, which Sears heads, and the Associate Deans' Council began studies on the university's retention problem. Sears said his study was prompted by a general concern about retention, especially from the Rev. James C. Carter, S.J., university president. "For a number of years, retention and attrition studies had been done, but there was a desire to know what Loyola's retention rate was," Sears said. "We progressed very rapidly past that point." Loyola's attrition rate, the percentage of students who leave before completing a degree, is much higher than the 24-27 percent range among private four-year colleges and the 23 percent rate among Catholic schools, both reported in Alexander W. Austin's book Preventing Students From Dropping Out. Most students who leave drop out after one year for a variety of reasons, according to Sears. "Personal reasons" and "transfer to another school" were the two most common given by students in Sears' study. 4 'ISone of us wants to be guilty of perpetrating a system in which the student can exhibit clear signs of having problems, and we as a university sit back and do nothing." —Lundy Carter selects committee for athletics study By Annette Pena Staff writer The possibility of bringing intercollegiate athletics back to Loyola is now being examined by a special committee organized by the Rev. James C. Carter, S.J., university president, at the request of the Student Government Association. Last semester, SGA requested that the university administration study the value of restoring athletics after newly elected president David Kramer told congress that such a move would likely improve sagging school spirit. Getting the university to conduct the study was one of Kramer's promises during last spring's SGA campaign. Kramer said he made recommendations to Carter on how committee members should be selected. The committee includes Kramer, four-term SGA representative Shawn Murray, Dr. F. Conrad Raabe, associate professor of political science; Dr. Cora Presley, associate professor of history; Beverly Murphy, director of Alumni Affairs; Vincent P. Knipfing, vice president for Student Affairs; Jay Calamia, of the General Accounting Office; Craig Bogar, director of the Recreation Center; the Rev. Benjamin Wren, associate professor of history; Dr. Paul V. Murray, assistant professor of education; and Felix Gaudin, the alumnae representative who directed the last study on the return of athletics in 1977. Byron Arthur, last year's SGA president, will serve as an alternate on the committee. The committee selected Raabe to be its chairman at its first meeting Sept. 4. Kramer explained that there are only two students on the committee because he had recommended that the size of the group be kept small. Since representatives from so many interests were needed, only two student positions were available, he said. Student attitudes will weigh heavily into the committee's final decision, Kramer emphasized. "At some point we will seek student input beyond Shawn and myself," he said. Murray, the other student representative on the committee, said she will examine the question of restoring athletics with an open mind. "1 don't know enough about the subject right now to say whether sports would be good or bad — 1 just want the best for Loyola," she said. The committee will begin its research by examining similar research done at Loyola more than 10 years ago. After reviewing the previous studies, the committee will then decide whether or not "to replicate, modify, or perhaps take a different path altogether," Raabe said. Raabe said that if the committee decides (hat bringing back athletics would be worthwhile, it would develop a plan to meet Loyola's standards of scholastic integrity and spiritual tradition. Students would have to be willing to support the program financially, he said. The cost of the program is crucial, Raabe said. Thousands of dollars would be needed to buy equipment for both male and female teams, hire coaches, and perhaps provide scholarships. The costs would result in another sizeable rise in tuition, he said. Raabe said he expects to present the committee's decision to Carter around April 1987. Carter would then decide whether or not to present their findings to the University Board of Trustees. See Retention/page 5

Archival image is an 8-bit greyscale tiff that was scanned from microfilm at 300 dpi. The original file size was 1526.77 KB.

Transcript

The MAROON Vol. 65, No. 3 Loyola University, New Orleans, Louisiana 70118 September 12, 1986 Students need personal touch By Mary Caffrey News Editor HERETO STAY? Loyola fights retention problem Richard was once a student at Loyola. He arrived at Biever Hall last year with a 1430 SAT score, a scholarship and all the wide-eyed enthusiasm of a child loose in a candy store. As a high school student, Richard (not his real name) never learned to handle social situations. His family had always told him when to eat, when to study and when to sleep. Now he was suddenly free — and in New Orleans of all places. Richard's first trip to a bar led to a discipline report for vomiting into a trash can. A Residential Life official met with him a few times after the incident. "He tried to get to know me a little, but he had a lot of other things to worry about," he said. During that first semester Richard skipped onethird of his classes, did poorly on tests and spent his nights playing video games in the Wolf Pub. Only one of his professors mentioned his poor attendance, and Richard said the comment "wasn't the kind of thing you took seriously." Richard had two 10-minute meetings with his departmental adviser that semester. He said the honors adviser in charge of administering his scholarship tried to help, but that wasn't until Richard showed up at his office a week before final exams. After one semester, Richard had a 1.0 grade point average and a bad case of bronchitis that later developed into pneumonia, forcing him to take a medical withdrawal from the university during his second semester. Richard said his lack of maturity made his adjustment problems inevitable. "I probably would have done just as bad anywhere else. The only thing that might have helped would have been waiting a few years, [before leaving home] and then i might not have fallen down as far; maybe I would have had a C average," he said. "I really don't think the university is responsible." Richard's case is extreme, but like many other students who leave Loyola, he was sending out warning signals almost from the very first day — signals that were scattered like parts of a puzzle the university couldn't put together. Although Richard, who is now attending a small commuter college in his hometown, doesn't hold Loyola responsible for what happened, the university is beginning to take responsibility for students like him. A report last year from John F. Sears, director of Institutional Research, showed that 52.1 percent of the freshmen who entered Loyola in 1981 left before completing their degree. Following that report, both the University Retention Committee, which Sears heads, and the Associate Deans' Council began studies on the university's retention problem. Sears said his study was prompted by a general concern about retention, especially from the Rev. James C. Carter, S.J., university president. "For a number of years, retention and attrition studies had been done, but there was a desire to know what Loyola's retention rate was," Sears said. "We progressed very rapidly past that point." Loyola's attrition rate, the percentage of students who leave before completing a degree, is much higher than the 24-27 percent range among private four-year colleges and the 23 percent rate among Catholic schools, both reported in Alexander W. Austin's book Preventing Students From Dropping Out. Most students who leave drop out after one year for a variety of reasons, according to Sears. "Personal reasons" and "transfer to another school" were the two most common given by students in Sears' study. 4 'ISone of us wants to be guilty of perpetrating a system in which the student can exhibit clear signs of having problems, and we as a university sit back and do nothing." —Lundy Carter selects committee for athletics study By Annette Pena Staff writer The possibility of bringing intercollegiate athletics back to Loyola is now being examined by a special committee organized by the Rev. James C. Carter, S.J., university president, at the request of the Student Government Association. Last semester, SGA requested that the university administration study the value of restoring athletics after newly elected president David Kramer told congress that such a move would likely improve sagging school spirit. Getting the university to conduct the study was one of Kramer's promises during last spring's SGA campaign. Kramer said he made recommendations to Carter on how committee members should be selected. The committee includes Kramer, four-term SGA representative Shawn Murray, Dr. F. Conrad Raabe, associate professor of political science; Dr. Cora Presley, associate professor of history; Beverly Murphy, director of Alumni Affairs; Vincent P. Knipfing, vice president for Student Affairs; Jay Calamia, of the General Accounting Office; Craig Bogar, director of the Recreation Center; the Rev. Benjamin Wren, associate professor of history; Dr. Paul V. Murray, assistant professor of education; and Felix Gaudin, the alumnae representative who directed the last study on the return of athletics in 1977. Byron Arthur, last year's SGA president, will serve as an alternate on the committee. The committee selected Raabe to be its chairman at its first meeting Sept. 4. Kramer explained that there are only two students on the committee because he had recommended that the size of the group be kept small. Since representatives from so many interests were needed, only two student positions were available, he said. Student attitudes will weigh heavily into the committee's final decision, Kramer emphasized. "At some point we will seek student input beyond Shawn and myself," he said. Murray, the other student representative on the committee, said she will examine the question of restoring athletics with an open mind. "1 don't know enough about the subject right now to say whether sports would be good or bad — 1 just want the best for Loyola," she said. The committee will begin its research by examining similar research done at Loyola more than 10 years ago. After reviewing the previous studies, the committee will then decide whether or not "to replicate, modify, or perhaps take a different path altogether," Raabe said. Raabe said that if the committee decides (hat bringing back athletics would be worthwhile, it would develop a plan to meet Loyola's standards of scholastic integrity and spiritual tradition. Students would have to be willing to support the program financially, he said. The cost of the program is crucial, Raabe said. Thousands of dollars would be needed to buy equipment for both male and female teams, hire coaches, and perhaps provide scholarships. The costs would result in another sizeable rise in tuition, he said. Raabe said he expects to present the committee's decision to Carter around April 1987. Carter would then decide whether or not to present their findings to the University Board of Trustees. See Retention/page 5